The language of the moment or, as it were, the language of the order in which we live, is the image. I felt that if I wanted to commune with the public, I should best do so through the language of image. It’s a conscious embrace of a contradiction.
What I’m trying to do is to at least raise a flag to the blinding light of technology.
I think there’s an enormous value to being negative. The world we live in today, negativity is not permitted.
But in fact if you look at film as a metaphor, only through the negative can you have the positive print. What I’m trying to get to is the positive value of negation.
I think it’s the tragedy of our time that we’re not aware of the affect of the manner in which we’ve adopted tools. Those tools have become who we are.
Technology is not neutral.
In terms of the feeling of the piece, I cant think about what people are gonna think about it, what are the critics gonna say, I’m trying to bring some resolution, and realize that myself. It’s a struggle; it’s a process that gets us this.
Technology has become as ubiquitous as the air we breathe, so we are no longer conscious of its presence.
So to hope to be able to have peace, to be able to have justice and environmental balance, are consequences of our behavior, not just our intentions.
The only thing I can do is type. I learned that when I was 13.
It’s not just the effect of technology on the environment, on religion, on the economic structure, on society, on politics, etc. It’s that everything now exists in technology to the point where technology is the new and comprehensive host of nature of life.
It is very easy to make clear what you want a film to say, but I did not wish to engage in overt propaganda, even for the right cause. I wanted to create an experience through the films, something where people could have the freedom of their own response to them.